sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cockade, Ebba Brahe, Gustav III, Mantilla, Tricorne

ISSN 2002-3898 © Maria Berlova and Nordic Theatre Studies DOI: https://doi.org/10.7146/nts.v26i1.109744 Published with support from Nordic Board for Periodicals in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NOP-HS)

Playing King

Maria Berlova

ABSTRACT The Swedish King Gustav III ruled from 1771 to 1792. His departure to the Russian war in 1788 was staged as a grandiose spectacle. The King, who was also a playwright, made the day of his departure coincide with the symbolic date of June 23. This was the date that Gustav II Adolph (ruled 1611-32) went off to the Thirty Years? War in 1628. The parallel between Gustav III and the great Swedish warrior King was further emphasized by his costume made in the style of Gustav Adolph. In this article, the author analyzes Gustav III?s departure to war as a theatrical event and explores the borders of theatrical events in the late eighteenth century. Gustav III?s ceremonial departure is placed in the framework of Nikolai Evreinov?s and Yuri Lotman?s theories of theatricality which show how the King applied theatrical means to everyday life in order to theatricalize it, i.e. to make it spectacular and symbolic. By theatricalizing life Gustav III idealized his role of king and thus performed his power. Theatricalization of political life not only adorned life but it also significantly changed reality; the theatrical playing of the King entailed real consequences ? Gustav III enacted his role of a monarch in a memorable way and achieved his political goals. The interaction between politics and theater is the main focus of the article. The author also explores the poetics of theatrical playing in politics. Obviously, the relation between the King-performer and his subjects-spectators was different from the usual actor-spectator relation in the traditional theater. During the communication of the King-performer and his subjects-spectators the political context was of significant importance; the main purpose of such communication was political propaganda. As a result of his ceremonial departure and, eventually, the theatricalization of war, the King succeded in becoming a national hero among the simple people, which proves the efficacy of theatrical means.

Keyw ords: Gustav III, theatricalization of politics, Swedish theater of the , Yuri Lotman, Nikolai Evreinov, .

BIOGRAPHY Maria Berlova is a lecturer in European Art History at the Russian University of Theater Arts (GITIS, Moscow, ). She also works as a Senior Researcher at the State Institute for Art Studies. Right now she is working on two book projects: Performing Power. Political Masks of Gustav III in English and Theater of the King in Russian. Berlova received her MA in theater studies at GITIS in 2006, and PhD in 2011. She obtained her second PhD from University in 2013. Her research interests are European theater history of the eighteenth century, particularly Swedish and Russian theater history. [email protected]

80 Nordic Theatre Studies 8 vol.26: no.1 Playing King MARIA BERLOVA

The Swedish King Gustav III ruled during from appealing to the image of Gustav Vasa (1523-60) 1771 to 1792. His departure to the Russian war while addressing the peasantry of Dalarna, a prov- in 1788 was staged as a grandiose spectacle. The ince in central , Gustav III managed to gath- King, who was also a playwright, made the day of er militia to protect from the Danes in his departure coincide with the symbolic date of 1788, during the Russian-Swedish war. By perform- June 23. This was the date that Gustav II Adolph ing his role of the King-protector, he succeeded in (ruled 1611-32) went off to the Thirty Years’ War in introducing a special war-tax during the session of 1628. The parallel between Gustav III and the great the in 1789. Swedish warrior King, who is credited as the found- The interaction between politics and theater will er of Sweden as a Great Power as he led Sweden to be the main focus of my article. I shall also explore military supremecy during the Thirty Years’ War, the poetics of theatrical playing in politics. Obvi- was further emphasized by his costume. Accord- ously the relation between the King-performer and ing to Frederick Axel von Fersen, Gustav III wore a his subjects-spectators was different from the usual camisole decorated in the style of Gustav II Adolph actor-spectator relation in the traditional theater. with the sword of Carl XII (ruled 1697-1718) on a During the communication of the King-perform- broad sash on his side and, on his head, the er and his subjects-spectators the political context of Carl XI (ruled 1660-97) with a yellow-and-blue was of significant importance; the main purpose of .1 such communication was political propaganda and The purpose of this article is to analyze Gustav at times, as shown above, the concrete political goals III’s departure to war as a theatrical event and ex- of the King. The communication between the per- plore the outcomes of theatrical events in the late forming King and his subjects did not presuppose eighteenth century. I shall place this event in the the emergence of theatrical fiction as the main goal framework of Nikolai Evreinov’s and Yuri Lotman’s as in the traditional theater. By theatrical means the theories of theatricality, showing how the King ap- King played himself, it was a self-idealization, i.e. plied theatrical means to everyday life in order to the transformation of reality and not the imaginary theatricalize it, i.e. to make it spectacular and sym- theatrical world. The interpretation of a theatrical bolic. By theatricalizing life Gustav III idealized his event was required from the subjects when the King role of king and thus performed his power. Theatri- performed in front of them. But this event took calization of political life not only adorned life but it place in the context of real life, therefore life roles also significantly changed reality; the theatrical play- of both the King and his subjects also came into ing of the King entailed real consequences – Gustav play. Let’s consider the King’s departure in terms III enacted his role of monarch in a memorable way of a theatrical event occuring in real life, but one and achieved his political goals. For instance, by which likely had its source inspiration in the realm

Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 81 of Gustav III’s explorations within drama. emphasized the admiration of the King by his sub- The King’s departure was highly ceremonial. jects and within the various strata of society. The The solemn procession that accompanied the King same admiration the King aspired to receive in real made its way from the palace to the waterfront. life and therefore he resorted to powerful theatrical After the halberd carrying troops, the court pages means. The ceremonial departure of the King can and the state counselors, the King himself parad- be compared to the scene from his play Gustav Vasa ed at the right hand of the Queen followed by the staged as an opera in the Royal Theater in 1786. In Prince. Already about ten years old, he ac- the play, after his victory over the Danes and liber- companied the Duchess Hedvig Elisabeth Charlot- ation of Stockholm, Gustav Vasa was celebrated by ta, the wife of the King’s brother, Carl, with a grandiose procession showed on stage. On June the courtiers behind them in no particular order. 23 1788, Gustav III resorted to the same theatri- The procession was closed by an innumerable crowd cal means with the only difference that the world of people of all estates and ages. At the staircase that became his stage, his subjects became his actors led to the dock, the King embraced the Queen, the and the main role was performed by the King him- Crown Prince and the Duchess; the members of the self. This was a characteristic feature of Gustavian Council who stood in line were allowed to kiss the theater, following the spirit of the epoch, that easily King’s hand. Then, Gustav III together with Duke transgressed the borders of the traditional theater Frederick Adolph, accompanied by a select retinue and transformed reality by producing a theatrical boarded a waiting sloop. Hearing the greeting accla- event. mations of the crowd, the King stopped the sloop, The theatrical playing in which Gustav III con- answered with an emotional hurray, and then sailed sciously indulged could be considered as the basis to his flagship Amphion anchored at the island of of his daily activities. The theoretical confirmation Skeppsholmen. After Gustav III signaled his depar- of this idea can be found in the works of Nikolai ture, twenty eight galleys ceremonially passed along Evreinov who contended that theatrical playing is the ship; but the Monarch’s ship which followed an anthropological and biological function of all them was delayed till morning because of unfavora- living organisms. ble winds. The ships of the Swedish flotilla moored In 1908, Nikolai Evreinov, Russian stage direc- at the islands of Fjäderholmarna not far of Stock- tor, playwright and theater theorist, introduced the holm also had to wait for favorable winds.2 Thus, we term ‘theatricality’ (teatralnost), which had a wide see that the theatricalized departure of the King was spectrum of meanings. A ruthless opponent of nat- hardly consonant with the conditions of real life. uralism in the theater of his time, Evreinov was an The theatrical playing and the impression from the apologist of theatricality both in art and in daily life. departure were much more important than reality He has written a great number of books in which he itself, especially if one takes into account the fact defended his concept of theatricality: Theater as it is that the Swedish fleet was not ready for war with (Театр как таковой) (1912), Theater for Oneself Russia. (Театр для себя) (1915-17), Theater among Ani- This ceremonial departure of the King was in mals (Театр у животных) (1924), Theatrotherapy the spirit of his historical drama where he depicted (Театротерапия) (1920) among others. himself in the images of his predecessors King Gus- Evreinov detected the rudiments of theatrical- tav I Vasa and King Gustav II Adolph. However the ity in the plant realm and in the behavior of ani- main character of a King in Gustav III’s drama was mals. In his chapter “Theater and Nature” (Театр an Enlightened King who was refined and could и природа) from Theater among Animals he writes: philosophize like ’s characters.3 Gustav’s “… in this vegetable masquerade among the mesem- dramas were connected to the court rituals as they bryanthemums we see not only a ‘masquerade’, not often depicted ceremonial processions and celebra- simply a ‘mask’ of some incognito, but a genuine role tions. The perception of the King by his subjects in every one of these unconscious plant-actors, a role was always important to Gustav III. In his plays he of an entirely definite image, necessary in the drama

82 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 of their seemingly unprotected life! This ‘drama’ is and his passion for theater was fully able to find its an almost immobile wise pantomime in which all the outlet there. Although the King performed for his actors by means of their strictly coordinated playing subjects, the fact that his subjects did not always attain the effect of a backdrop, the mastery of which enjoy his playing didn’t disturb Gustav III. Such was depends not only the pitiful success of the buffoons the case of the part of the nobility who disliked the in a show-booth, but life itself – the very existence performing king and considered him a hypocrite. of these actors, forced to represent a given and not a During Gustav’s ceremonial departure to war different ‘landscape’!4 Evreinov’s opinion of the sur- with Russia, the playing was meant for spectators rounding world is so legitimate from the point of with the obvious purpose of political propaganda, view of the theater that the author does not use any but at the same time it fulfilled the needs of Gus- terminology other than that of the theater. Evreinov tav III himself, his passion for acting. The theatrical writes about “the theater of animals” that “the tiger behavior of the King and his clearly expressed “in- stalks” (his prey) “representing” his absence, rustling stinct of transfiguration”, are illustrated by the fol- “in imitation” of the wind among the thickets in the lowing episode from the diary of Duchess Hedvig protective mask of their “nature”.5 Elisabeth Charlotta dated June 1788. According to Evreinov, human beings are also According to Duchess Charlotta, Gustav III in- theatrical creatures.6 However, in contrast to an- vited her and Princess Sofia Albertina to visit him imals, the theater of people is seen by Evreinov as on the ship Amphion when the flotilla, at anchor consciously transformed reality. One of the basic not far from Stockholm, was waiting for a favorable instincts governing human activities is the “instinct wind. The party who gathered for dinner made fun of transfiguration”.7 In his book Theater for Oneself of the amusing grey tricorne that was worn by the Evreinov gives convincing examples of this instinct. senior attendant Evert Taube. Taube retorted that an In the chapter “The Demented King” (Король- exactly similar tricorne worn by Carl XI was kept in безумец) the author writes about Ludwig II of Ba- a safe place in Drottningholm. The King expressed varia (1864-86) who often gave orders for setting the desire to get this as soon as possible the table for a large number of guests, but stayed and the Duchess promised to send it to him, which alone for dinner. Ludwig entertained his imaginary she did on the next day. In her own words, Char- guests, thus inventing reality and creating “a theater lotta attached to the tricorne an antique cockade. for himself”.8 The King thanked Charlotta in a letter, saying to her Gustav III liked to organize a theater for him- that the tricorne would bring him luck. He prom- self. As, for instance, during the theater season ised the Duchess he would return the cockade to 1775-76 in Gripsholm, the King’s residence, Axel her after the first glorious victory as was done in Fersen wrote: “H. M. dined often at the theater the past by the knights who deposed their weapons and, at the end of the performance, the king came at the feet of their ladies.10 It remains unclear why, to supper with the whole court dressed in his theater according to the narrative of Axel Fersen, the King costume. So we have seen him dressed up as Rhad- was already wearing the tricorne of Carl XI the day amiste, Cinna, and as the high priest of the Temple of his departure. Henrika Tanfeld thinks that this of Jerusalem; presenting himself as an object of ridi- might be because Fersen was critical of the King’s cule at his own table.”9 However, in contrast to Lud- indolence, wastefulness and fantasies, and thus was wig II of Bavaria, an extreme example of passionate inclined to exaggerate as it can often be traced in playing in real life, Gustav III was guided first of all his observations.11 Thus, one can assume that on the by political motives. As a result, Gustav III’s play- day of the departure, the King was wearing an ordi- ing on stage ended at the insistence of the French nary tricorne. ambassador D’Usson who was important because Taking into account the fact that Gustav III had Sweden at that time received heavy subsidies from received the tricorne of Carl XI after his theatrical- .9 The King was forced to stop performing on ized departure emphasizes the predilection of Gus- stage, but he never stopped performing in politics tav III for theatricality in his active life. The King

Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 83 did not stop his theatrical actions even after the symbolic date chosen for the event, and the theat- event described above, creating theater for himself rical behavior of the Monarch when, sailing off in a and inspiring himself by his historical attire. sloop, he greeted his subjects with a double hurray. That courtly playing and theatricality were clear- Theatricality was a hyperbola. By playing the lead- ly present in the military campaign of Gustav III is ing role in the spectacle, Gustav still respected the also demonstrated by the following fact: the name court etiquette. He did not depart from his social of his ship Amphion was the name of an opera by status, but played his role as a king representing , which was performed himself in idealized light, thus creating not just his on the court stage from 1777 to 1778.12 Amphion personal theater but also political propaganda. was the son of Antiope and Zeus and was famous The presence of the audience is not indispen- for playing the lyre so sweetly that he moved stones sable for Evreinov’s ‘actor’ who, above all, creates to erect buildings. On the one hand, theatrical play- theater for himself; however Evreinov appeals to ing in life was the direct continuation of fictional spectators as shown in the following example. playing on the court scene. However, one the other Once, in his youth, when he was a student at hand, Amphion can also be understood as the al- the Institute of Jurisprudence in , legorical representation of the King as a ‘civilizer’; Evreinov had been locked in solitary confinement thus Gustav adhered to a widespread tradition for as punishment for hooliganism. His friends, in using mythological figures in his state propaganda. order to support the prisoner, slipped notes under From Evreinov’s point of view, theatricality is a his door. However, Evreinov needed another kind means of conduct in society. Theatricality is a hy- of attention. He was imagining that he was not sit- perbole, a demonstration, the divesting of a means, ting in a cell behind a closed door, but inside an in other words, a theater that openly declares itself iron cage, and that the surrounding people could to the world. Evreinov calls everyone to set up a see how he was suffering.13 personal theater in ordinary life according to the Thus, Evreinov considers the spectator, either a rules demanded by the prevalent etiquette, profes- real one or an imaginary figure, as an essential com- sion or standing in society. In the case of Gustav ponent of his concept of theatricality. The presenta- III, he created his theater playing his social role of a tion acquires a certain meaning when it is designed king. Therefore, his interest in theater was beyond for the audience. However, the meaning of theat- the personal, it was official and entailed political ricality as a result of the interaction between actor consequences. Dramas by Gustav III depicting an and spectators is not included in Evreinov’s concept; ideal image of a king were an efficient tool for prop- it is the form of expression that concerns him most, aganda. The fact that the King was a very skillful and the form of expression addressed to spectators, playwright with an eye of a stage director and per- present or imaginary, is meaningful as such. sonal experience of an actor as well as the fact that In the case of playing the king, the audience was he actively participated in actors’ training and stage indispensable. During the theatricalized departure design made his plays and theatricalizations of life of Gustav III to war, the King’s representation was especially powerful. Obviously, the King knew how addressed to the beholders, however it did not nec- to make his spectators become participants of his essarily require their direct participation, emotional theatrical actions, which, as a rule, resulted in his or intellectual. The purpose of this spectacle was to political success. demonstrate the King’s power and it was achieved According to Evreinov, one can characterize the- thanks to the theatrical form of expression. Thus in atricality during the departure of Gustav III to war the case of Gustav III, Evreinov’s concept needs to as a hyperbola. The King openly theatricalized an be broadened: the aesthetic form of the event was event of real life, namely, his real departure to war, valuable in itself and spoke for itself but it was not showing it in the form of a spectacle inserted into entirely a piece of art, it was first of all a political life with the help of such clearly expressed theatri- instrument, besides the grandiose spectacle it also cal means as the historical attire of the King, the produced strong political propaganda.

84 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Yuri Lotman, another theoretician of theatrical- The King staged a provocation on the border: Swed- ity with a Russian background, bases his concept on ish soldiers dressed as Russian Cossacks attacked the the example of the eighteenth century, which can be Finnish border post Pumala on the Finnish-Russian relevant for our case. border.17 This was a pretext for Gustav III to engage In his book Talks about the Russian Culture in ‘defensive’ action. Therefore, the beginning of the (Беседы о русской культуре) Lotman reveals the war with Russia can already be considered as a kind phenomenon that characterizes the period from the of theatricalization. Also noteworthy is the fact that second half of the eighteenth century to the begin- the drama of Gustav III, Siri , that extolled ning of the nineteenth century, namely, noble class Gustav II Adolph was represented with great fanfare imitating art, in other words, the theatricalization in Stockholm in the spring of 1788. This histori- of life. Lotman writes that “the boundary between cal drama depicts the manners and politics of the art and everyday life has been destroyed. The theater commencement of the reign of Gustav Adolph as irrupted into life, actively rearranging the day to day Crown Prince; it gives a moral lesson in the spirit of behavior of people. Monologue finds its way in let- the Enlightenment and presents the King as a great ters, diary and common language. What could look example of true virtue. The intentional staging of pompous and funny yesterday when it belonged the play can be regarded as a prelude for the theat- only to the sphere of theatrical space, becomes the ricalization of war with Russia: Gustav III referred norm of speech and everyday behavior […] There is to Gustav Adolph in his plays (in 1783 he wrote a large number of examples that show how people Gustav Adolph and and Magnanimity of in the second half of the 18th century to the begin- Gustav Adolph) and later in real life, in his theat- ning of the 19th century used to fashion their own ricalizations of war. Gustav aspired to achieve the behavior, everyday language, and in the final greatness and popularity of Gustav Adolph which the fate of their life according to literary and theat- was one of the reasons why he initiated the war. rical standards”.15 Thus, in the politics of Gustav III’s theatre, the ide- Lotman sees the theatricalization of life in poses alization of the image of the King was presented as and gestures and in ritual behavior often borrowed a model to be imitated in real life. from theater and drama. As a convincing illustra- In his article, “Poetics of Everyday Behavior in tion Lotman cites the description of the theatri- the Eighteenth-Century Russian Culture”, Lotman calization of Napoleon’s court life by Mme Genlis. presents an argumentation about the theatricaliza- Genlis writes that “one could see in the Tuileries a tion of life. He writes that the conduct of Russian strange mixture of foreign etiquettes. The court cer- nobility was borrowed from after the re- emonies were supplemented with much borrowed forms of Peter the Great in the seventeenth century. from the theatrical lore. One witty person noticed As a consequence, “the Russian nobleman was like at that time that the ceremonial of admission to a foreigner in his own country”.18 However, this did Court was an exact imitation of the introduction of not mean that they became foreigners, they just be- Eneas to the Carthagian Queen in the opera “Di- haved like foreigners by pursuing a life of playing, dona”. It is a well known fact that the famous actor of constantly feeling as if they were on stage, and of [Talma – M. B.] has often been consulted about the following the borrowed norms of conduct by which design of costumes for festive days”.16 they were judged by their contemporaries. In this By considering the fact that Gustav III was an way, Lotman emphasizes the representative charac- actor, a playwright, and a stage director, it becomes ter of the social conduct of the Russian nobility, and evident that the King used the artifices of theater in that allows the author to speak of the characteristics his politics. Theatrical elements were present in the of theater in day to day life.19 war with Russia from the very beginning. According Speaking of Gustav III during his departure to to the , the King did not have the right war, one can say that the theatricalization of the to start a war without the consent of the Parliament, King was based on the model of behavior of one so instead he resorted to the following stratagem. of his predecessors, Gustav II Adolph. Gustav III

Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 85 chose his symbolic date for his own departure and that Gustav III improvised depending on the course borrowed his costume. It is hardly plausible that of the events. According to Lotman’s conception, Gustav III who was frail of body could imitate the one can say that Gustav III had several mask-roles manners of his model who was a rather stout warri- within his heroic stock role, Gustav Vasa and Gus- or. However, the historical parallel that was used to tav II Adolph were among them. During his depar- build the image of Gustav III was obviously present. ture to war, the heroic stock role of the King was This allows us to speak of the representative charac- enacted through the mask-role of Gustav II Adolph. ter of his performance, i.e. of the theatricalization If Evreinov enables us to look at theatrical play- of the King’s behavior in Lotman’s understanding. ing from the anthropological point of view, as the By using the semiotic approach, Lotman con- basis of living activities, Lotman helps to give this structs a whole system of theatricalization concern- playing a structure and to look at theatricalization ing the social behavior of the Russian nobility. He as a symbolic form. introduces the concept of stock role, i.e., a definite Looking at the theatrical means of the King’s kind of deportment striving to a certain ideal. Lot- performance, it is worthwhile to point out, first of man gives examples of the most common stock roles all, the costume of the King. The connection with used by Russian nobility: bogatyr, or legendary hero, the past, brought to mind by the historical costume, miracle-working giant, marvel-hero, the jester, and had already been conceived during Gustav III’s cor- the buffoon. Another widespread stock role was the onation on 29 May 1772. During the sumptuous Russian Diogenes, or new cynic. A stock role can be ceremony, the King wore a costume compared to a dramatic type in theater performanc- made after the attire of Carl XI; the King’s broth- es. In their choice of stock roles the nobility based ers wore costumes that did not belong to any defi- their conduct on historical and state dignitaries, nite epoch. According to Fersen, in order to satisfy or literary and theatrical characters. In addition to the King, who liked everything that reminded of stock roles Lotman speaks of mask-roles, i.e. certain a historical past, the ideas for these costumes were roles within the stock role. Within one stock role a borrowed from a few ancient portraits belonging to variety of mask-roles can appear. A mask-role served three different centuries.21 In this way, during the as the fix point of a plot on which were threaded coronation, there was already a display of the theme ever newer episodes of anecdotal life history.20 The of knighthood. A theme which was developed con- number of stock roles was limited, but anyone was siderably during the reign of Gustav III. allowed to wear several mask-roles in succession. Similarly, the King’s costume at the time of his Apart from that, the deportment corresponding to departure for war was not an exact copy of the cos- a given stock role under the conditions of real life tume of Gustav II Adolph but it was created in close acquired an improvisational character. association with it. The references to the kings Carl During his departure, Gustav III impersonat- XI and Carl XII were not as evident, but the ac- ed a heroic role and followed the historical exam- cessories were apparently of the kind that inspired ple of Gustav II Adolph. The heroic role of Gustav Gustav III himself. The costume of the King pro- III started from the state coup of August 19, 1772, duced a composite image that referred the current which was aimed at the centralization of the King’s events to Swedish history. power. Then, in the course of one day, the King also One has also to take into consideration the ap- re-enacted the role of a King-hero by bringing to the pearance and manners of Gustav III when he played memory of his subjects his predecessors, the great the role of a king. A preserved pencil drawing by Kings Gustav Vasa and Gustav II Adolph which al- , the Gustavian court artist, lowed the King to bring the Army to his side and represents Gustav III on his way to a meeting of ensure his victory in the state coup without blood- Parliament. On the occasion of this solemn event shed. An appeal to history was characteristic for the the King wears a and a crown and holds theatricalization of the given epoch and in particu- a scepter in his right hand. His manly profile and lar for the representations of the King. Thus, we see his manner of walking speak of determination and

86 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 spiritual strength. Gustav III was slightly lame since ning as a victor marching on to military success. The birth but he had worked out a way of walking that theatricalization of life, according to Lotman, at- hid this defect. tached the symbolic meaning to life; it transformed By all appearances, the countenance of the King it and by making it spectacular, made it meaningful. could hardly remind one of Gustav II Adolph who Frederick Axel von Fersen, who had a critical was a stocky warrior-king. In contrast, Gustav III attitude toward the King, has also left the following was of a rather fragile stature with handsome and observation. He wrote in his memoirs that the joy of fine features, but that did not prevent him arous- the people and the “hurrays” during the departure ing in the spectators favorable associations with of Gustav III were due to the fact that significant his predecessors. A Stockholmer, Johan Hjerpe, amounts of money had been distributed among the who described the departure of the King in a diary people. While the King was boarding the ship, he preserved to this day, gleefully compares Gustav dropped his cockade and was utterly frightened by III with Gustav II Adolph, whose exploits, in his it. According to Fersen, the small incident, which words, the people continued to revere.22 According was rapidly dealt with, was taken as a bad omen.24 to this witness, one can recognize the great achieve- It is hard to evaluate the veracity of the mem- ment of Gustav III as performer and dramatist: oirs of the King’s contemporaries. In addition, the even without having an external resemblance to his perception of the beholders and the attitude of the predecessor, he could evoke emotional associations contemporaries did not, in fact, have a large signifi- with him. cance on the event. According to Evreinov’s theory, During the King’s departure, the historical pic- the theatricalization of Gustav III spoke for itself. It ture of Stockholm apparently came to the forefront. was a manifestation of the royal power, and the reac- At the same time, the theatrical element was includ- tions of beholders could not markedly influence the ed. The view of the Royal Palace and the quay was course of events. Such a manifestation of power, as used by Louis Jean Desprez, the Gustavian architect distinct from the traditional theater, did not require and stage designer, as a decoration in the opera Gus- the intellectual and emotional participation of the tav Vasa. The first national opera won the acclaim spectators and their significant interpretation of the of the spectators. Therefore, one can surmise that theatrical event. The parallel with Gustav II Adolph even the city itself, as scenery, brought forth definite was obvious; it was the same hyperbola, the same associations, both historical and theatrical. open device described by Evreinov. The display of In his book, Politics as Theater( Politik som teat- Gustav III was directed to the beholders, but be- er), Ingvar Holm indicates that at definite moments cause of its nature, it was monological and did not in history the symbolic becomes real. Thus, nobody demand a sharing of feelings with the beholders. believed that Napoleon III was Napoleon I when he People were called to take part in the theatricaliza- appeared in the costume of Bonaparte and imitated tion of the King as beholders in the same way as his way of conduct. But the situation needed a hero they could have been asked to play the role of ex- and thus the symbolic was perceived as real, people tras. Gustav III’s theatricalization was very similar eventually believed in Napoleon III.23 to the ‘Potemkin’s villages’ (Potyomkinskiye derevni) The same is true of the image of Gustav III when of Catherine the Great that became known all over the people saw the parallel between him and the Europe. Great Gustav II Adolph. Despite the fact that peo- The Potemkin’s villages were arranged by the ple were commanded onto the streets and even paid minister, Grigory Potemkin, during Catherine the for waving flags, the theatricalization of life reached Great’s journey to the Crimea in 1787. At the time, its goal by presenting the events of war as a specta- the country was in deep decline because of the war cle. Thus, Gustav III attained his objectives. Thanks with Turkey, but all the Empress was allowed to see to his theatricalized departure to war, his spectators’ during her trip was fairyland décor of blossoming behavior and not necessarily their true perceptions villages, bedecked with flowery garlands and trium- were such that Gustav III appeared from the begin- phal arches, and groups of peasants and city dwellers

Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 87 who greeted the sovereign of the prosperous Empire adorned with feathers of many colors. As in festive attire, merry and dancing. The Austrian soon as he left his estate, the wind blew his bonnet Emperor Joseph II, who accompanied Catherine II, off and threw it in the mud. The Woeful Knight’s called this journey “a hallucination”.25 travel continued in the same vein and ended in utter The royal ship slowly sailed the Dnieper to the disaster, but with some success.28 Black Sea, while the people, rushing to the shore, The comedy of Catherine II became a theatri- greeted ‘Mother-Empress’ with cries of joy. The cal interpretation of the theatricalized departure of flotilla consisted of six red and gold pleasure ships Gustav III to war, as it comically represented the which were followed by seventy-three smaller crafts. playing spirit of the Swedish King. Soon after the The Empress was dressed in a feminine adaptation performance was staged, Catherine II ordered the of the of the Preobrajensky regiment, intro- opera to be moved from the Hermitage Theater to duced by Peter I in 1720; she wore the same green the private theater of Nikolai Sheremetev in Mos- uniform with golden decorations during the state cow because she felt that such a spectacle was not coup of 1762 and at her meeting with Gustav III in proper in the presence of foreign ministers.29 Fredrikshamn in 1783.26 Even in her choice of cos- The poetics of playing in the case of a theatrical tume, Catherine II did her best to emphasize, not so performance at the Hermitage Court Theater dif- much the blood relationship, but her spiritual rela- fered from the poetics of theatricalization of life by tionship with Peter I. Just like Gustav III, Catherine the two monarchs. The poetics of theatrical playing the Great theatricalized the historical succession, in the politics of Gustav III and that of Catherine her relationship with the greatest Tsar among her the Great consisted in using theatrical means not to predecessors and also closeness to the people who create an imaginary subject and imaginary person- seemed to love their Empress so much. The form ages, but to create the real role of a king/empress. of the theatricalization of Catherine II, its symbolic The goal was not the creation of a fictional world meaning and the participation of the people in it, but the creation of political propaganda, which to a resembled the theatricalized departure of Gustav III certain extent has a relation with fiction but is real to war. The display was a manifestation of the impe- in its consequences. In spite of the artificial form of rial power and pure political propaganda. Gustav’s departure to the war, its result was entirely The Russian Empress herself reacted to the the- real – the King reinforced his power to a significant atricalized departure of Gustav III in the following extent and raised his popularity among the people way: upon learning about the staged departure of by appearing to them as a hero-warrior. What was Gustav III to war, she wrote, on July 7 1788, to important from the point of view of the perception Joseph II rather ironically that she had heard that of the beholders in the frame of the political the- Gustav III, dressed up in the attire and armor of atricalization of Gustav III was the collective im- Gustav II Adolph, had invaded her lands.27 The pression, rather than the individual impression of irony of Catherine II did not stop at that. Cath- spectators, their emotional and cognitive reactions, erine II, who, just like her Swedish cousin, was which are so important in the traditional theater. also a playwright, wrote the comedy Woeful Knight The function of the beholders during Gustav’s de- Kosometovich (Горебогатырь-Косометович) in parture to war was belittled as they did not have which it was not difficult to recognize a political any impact on the representation. Some spectators, pamphlet on Gustav III. The play was immediately as for instance Catherine the Great, were not even converted into a comical opera with music by Vi- physically present during the action. Retroactively, cente Martín y Soler and staged at the Hermitage the interpretation by the spectators could assume Court Theater (January 1789). In the play, inspired any form and even be critical as it was with Cath- by Russian folklore that appealed to the Empress, erine II and the Swedish aristocracy. However, this the Woeful Knight decided, out of boredom, to set did not influence the essence of the event in any off for heroic deeds dressed in an armor made of way; Gustav was represented as a great King. The cardboard, painted to look like iron, and in a cotton Russian-Swedish war did not bring victory to either

88 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Russia or Sweden, it ended with the Treaty of Värälä on August 14, 1790. Nevertheless, as a result of this war, Gustav’s popularity among the simple folk (not the nobility) was enhanced significantly and he was perceived as a King-liberator. Obviously, theatrical- ization of the King’s role was an important part of this success.

Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 89 NOTES ANDREFERENCES 22 Tandefelt, op. cit., p. 254. 1 Fredrik Axel von Fersens historiska skrifter, del VII, Stock- 23 Ingvar Holm, Politik som teater: från Bastiljen till Helge- holm 1871, p. 38. andsholmen, Carlssons, Stockholm 1991, p. 28. 2 Erik Lönnroth, Den stora rollen. Kung Gustaf III spelad av 24 Fredrik Axel von Fersens historika skrifter, del VII, op.cit., honom själv, Stockholm 1986, p. 164. pp. 38-9. 3 Ibid., pp. 75-6. 25 Richard S. Wortman, Scenarios of Power: Myth and Cer- 4 Николай Евреинов, ”Оригинал о портретистах” in emony in Russian Monarchy from Peter the Great to the Театр у животных [Nikolai Evreinov, “Teatr u zhivot- Abdication of Nicolas II, Princeton University Press, nyh” in Original o portretistakh], Moscow 2008 [1924], Princeton 2006, p. 71. p. 280. 26 Tandefelt, op. cit., p. 258. 5 Ibid., p. 284. 27 Ibid., p. 257. 6 Николай Евреинов, Театр для себя, I [Nikolai Evrei- 28 Екатерина II, Горебогатырь-Косометович, nov, Teatr dlia sebia, I], St. Petersburg 1915, p. 193. Сочиения Императрицы Екатерины II. 7 Николай Евреинов, Театр как таковой [Nikolai Произведения литературные, I, под ред. Арсения Evreinov, Teatr kak takovoi], Moscow 1923, p. 25. Введенского [Ekaterina II, Gorebogatyr-Kosometovich, 8 Евреинов, op.cit., p. 157. Sochinenia Imperatritsy Ekateriny II. Proizvedenia liter- 9 Matthew H. Wikander, Princes to Act: Royal Audience atyrnye, I, ed. Arseniy Vvedenskiy], St. Petersburg 1893, and Royal Performance 1578-1792, The Johns Hopkins pp. 356-66. University, Baltimore 1993, p. 272; Oscar Levertin, 29 Эрмитажный театр [Yermitazhniy teatr], Slavia, St. Teater och drama under Gustaf III, Stockholm 1889, p. Petersburg 2005, p. 47. 68. 10 Levertin, op. cit., p. 68. 11 Henrika Tandefelt, Konsten att härska. Gustaf III inför sina undersåtar, Svenska litteratursällskapet i , Helsingfors 2008, p. 259. 12 Ibid., pp. 259-60. 13 Ibid., p. 273. 14 Евреинов, op.cit., p. 54. 15 Юрий Лотман, Беседы о русской культуре [Yuri Lotman, Besedy o russkoi kulture], Isskustvo – SPB, St. Petersburg 1994, p. 183. 16 Ibid., p. 185. Quote from Dictionnaire critique et raison- né des etiquettes de la cour <…> Par M-me la comtesse de Genlis, vol. 1, 1818, pp. 18-9. 17 Ян Мелин, Альф В. Юханссон, Сюзанна Хеденборг, История Швеции [Jan Melin, Alf W. Jo- hansson, Susanna Hedenborg, Sveriges historia, 1997], Ves Mir, Moscow 2002, p. 159. 18 Iurii Lotman, “The Poetics of Everyday Behavior in Eighteenth-Century Russian Culture” in The Semiotics of Russian Cultural History, Alexander D. Nakhimovsky and Alice Stone Nakhimovsky, eds., Cornell University Press, Ithaca 1985, p. 69. 19 Ibid., p. 70. 20 Ibid., p. 82. 21 Fredrik Axel von Fersens historiska skrifter, del III, Stock- holm 1869, p. 83.

90 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1 Nordic Theatre Studies vol. 26: no. 1